Reassessment requires valid recorded reasons and disclosure failure; an unrelated section 69 addition cannot follow a different reopening issue.

Reassessment under section 147 is not valid where the material relied upon was already available during the original assessment and the recorded reasons do not establish failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts. On those facts, reopening based on Form 26AS and TCS information was unsustainable. An addition under section 69 for excess purchase cannot be made where the reassessment was initiated for a different issue, because the impugned addition must be linked to the recorded reasons for reopening. The amount was also stated to have been accounted for in the subsequent year, which raised the risk of double addition. The reassessment and the addition were both set aside.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether reassessment initiated under section 147 was valid when the material relied upon was already available during the original assessment and the recorded reasons did not establish failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts; (ii) whether the addition of Rs. 2,49,92,231/- on account of excess purchase under section 69 could be sustained when the reopening was for a different issue relating to TCS credit and the same amount had allegedly been accounted for in the subsequent year.

Issue (i): Whether reassessment initiated under section 147 was valid when the material relied upon was already available during the original assessment and the recorded reasons did not establish failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts.

Analysis: The reopening was founded on Form 26AS data relating to TCS on purchases, but that material was already available with the Assessing Officer at the time of the original assessment. The recorded reasons did not satisfactorily establish escapement of income on account of any failure by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. The reopening was thus not supported by the statutory conditions governing reassessment.

Conclusion: The reopening under section 147 was held invalid and unsustainable, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the addition of Rs. 2,49,92,231/- on account of excess purchase under section 69 could be sustained when the reopening was for a different issue relating to TCS credit and the same amount had allegedly been accounted for in the subsequent year.

Analysis: The reassessment was recorded to withdraw alleged excess TCS credit, but the assessment ultimately made an addition for excess purchase. The issue for which the case was reopened did not result in the impugned addition. The finding also noted that the amount was stated to have been booked in the next year, making the current-year addition vulnerable and raising the possibility of double addition. An addition on a matter not forming the basis of the recorded reasons was therefore impermissible on these facts.

Conclusion: The addition under section 69 was deleted, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The reassessment and the impugned addition were both set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment cannot be sustained where the statutory preconditions of section 147 are not met, and an addition cannot be made on an issue unrelated to the recorded reasons for reopening.

---